Safe Summer CelebrationsMichigan Occupational Safety and Health Act (MIOSHA)Vol. 4, No. 3 Summer 2000

Bay City fireworks display. (Photo by Dan Tomczak)

Cont. on Page 17

In This IssueSafe Summer Celebrations 1

Director’s Column 2

Construction Safety 3

Tenneco - MVPP Star 4

Crisis Intervention 5

Blood Lead Levels 6

The Bottom Line 7

Powered Industrial Trucks 8

Nursing Home Safety Strategies 9

Michigan Safety Conference 10

Michigan State AFL-CIO 11

Safety Council for Southwest MI 11

Wage & Hour News 12

Education & Training Calendar 13

Standards Update 14

Variances 16

MIOSHA Peer Support Team 17

Across hundreds of communities in Michi-gan this summer, fireworks displays will pro-vide an exciting conclusion to local festivities.However, as recent events have shown, fireworksare highly unstable and must be stored, trans-ported and displayed with extreme caution.

The devastating fireworks warehouse explo-sion in the Netherlands on May 13, 2000, whichkilled at least 20 people and injured more than600, has grimly reminded all professionals whohandle fireworks their first priority must be safety.

The Michigan Department of Consumer &Industry Services (CIS), under the leadership ofCIS Director Kathy Wilbu r , is making a con-certed effort to alert communities to the poten-

tial dangers involved in fireworks displays, andto help them prevent fireworks-related tragediesduring local summer celebrations.

“Improper handling of explosives can haveserious consequences,” said CIS Director KathyWilbur. “CIS is committed to providing the nec-essary tools to local communities to provide safefireworks celebrations for their citizens.”

The CIS Bureau of Safety and Regulation

is responsible for administering the MichiganOccupational Safety and Health Act (MIOSHA).MIOSHA hosted a special seminar, Safety Semi-nar for Fireworks in Municipalities , on May10th in Bay City. Response was so overwhelm-ing to the original seminar that MIOSHA addeda second session on May 31st. MIOSHA co-spon-sored the seminar with the Bay City Fire De-partment and Bay City Firefighters Local 1435.

“The hazards associated with fireworks andfireworks displays are significant,” saidMIOSHA Director Doug Earle. “We are hold-ing this seminar to help ensure that communi-ties have the information and training necessaryto protect workers, volunteers, and spectators

during fireworks demonstrations.”This special safety seminar provided

valuable information on how to providefireworks demonstrations that are notonly entertaining, but safe, for the gen-eral public. The seminar also coveredhow to provide a safe working environ-ment for the professionals and volunteersputting on the displays.

“The Bay City Fire Department isproud to co-host this seminar,” said BayCity Fire Marshal Michael Halstead. “Itis through education, after all, that weminimize the dangers inherent in the han-dling of fireworks.”

Lee Jay Kueppers, a safety consult-ant with the Consultation Education &Training Division (CET) coordinated theseminars. According to Kueppers, severalserious accidents and explosions duringfireworks displays in Michigan commu-nities, have caused local officials to seri-

ously examine their safety efforts. In June 1999,MIOSHA conducted a special seminar for fire-works manufacturers, which prompted severalmunicipalities to request this specialized train-ing from MIOSHA covering fireworks displays.

Bay City produces one of the largest fire-works displays in the state. In 1990, there was adangerous explosion during their display that

22222

From the

Bureau

Director’s

DeskBy: Douglas R. Earle, DirectorBureau of Safety & Regulation

Happy

Anniversary

MIOSHA

25 Years!

“Celebration Time Is Here”Did you know that July 1, 2000, is the 25th Anniversary of

the Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Act (MIOSHA)?If you said “yes,” you would be half right. Be honest now–did youreally remember that MIOSHA, when enacted in 1974, was pro-vided with two different effective dates? January 1, 1975, forprivate-sector employers and July 1, 1975, for public-sector em-ployers.

Do you know why there were two separate effective datesfor MIOSHA requirements?

A political “deal,” you say. Well, yes, all legislation that issuccessful represents political accommodations to some degree.In most cases there are good reasons for the political accom-modations, and the differing effective date “deal” is no excep-tion.

Indeed, Governor Milliken signed Senate Bill 698 on June18, 1974, which became Act 154 of 1974. The legislature gaveit “immediate effect” for the private sector on January 1, 1975,but deferred application of the requirements until July 1, 1975,for the public sector. The delay was deemed essential for pub-lic employers, who had not been previously covered by federalOSHA safety and health requirements, to comply with all thefederal safety and health standards that were being adopted byreference under the new law.

On the afternoon of Monday, June 26th, 2000, at a bureaumeeting for all employees, we commemorated the 25th anni-versary of MIOSHA. A number of people who played signifi-cant roles regarding worker health and safety during the past25 years were invited to return for the program and a recep-tion afterwards. Some were asked to speak and provide theirunique perspectives on MIOSHA.

Governor John Engler issued an Executive Declarationcongratulating MIOSHA on 25 years of dedicated public ser-vice in protecting Michigan workers and promoting safe andhealthful workplaces. The Governor applauded MIOSHA’s ef-forts to work cooperatively with Michigan employers to iden-tify problem areas and seek practical solutions.

From the beginning, the focus of the MIOSHA programhas been to help assure a safe and healthy workplace for everyMichigan worker. MIOSHA has worked diligently to help re-duce workplace injuries, illnesses and fatalities, while at thesame time emphasizing the message to employers and employ-ees that workplace safety and health makes good business sense.

We are proud of MIOSHA’s long history of committed service tothe safety and health of Michigan workers.

MIOSHA Management Reorganization ofConsultation Education and Training Services

In keeping with the spirit of providing readers of theMIOSHA News with a special heads-up regarding significantprogram changes, I want to announce a recent major reorganiza-tion in the MIOSHA program. The management responsibilitiesfor MIOSHA consultation, education, and training services havebeen consolidated under one division. The SET (Safety Educa-tion & Training) Division has been combined with the consulta-tion, education and training units of the Occupational HealthDivision–to form the new CET (Consultation, Education andTraining) Division. CET Division Chief, Maryann Markham, isresponsible for all MIOSHA health and safety consultation, edu-cation and training services.

While I have a number of expectations regarding the futureof our CET services, among them is the expectation that the con-solidation of the management structure will be of significant helpin obtaining one of our major goals of providing “seamless” ser-vice to employers and employees concerning workplace healthand safety. In addition, my expectation is that the services will bemore accessible, while at the same time we will continue thehigh quality of services.

New MIOSHA General Industry Inspection andCET Services Scheduling Systems

In another area of the MIOSHA program, we will soon beimplementing a new inspection scheduling system for compli-ance staff in the General Industry Safety Division. The programwill be based upon multiple data sources, including workers’ com-pensation information. The new program should enable us totarget those establishments for investigations that are having themost problems and avoid inspecting those establishments thatare providing a safe and healthy work environment.

We will also use this combination of data services to betterreach worksites whose safety and health practices need improve-ment, and who wish to avail themselves of our CET services.There will be more detailed information on the new schedulingsystems in future editions of the MIOSHA News.

Summer 2000

33333

Anatomy of an Accident:

Cont. on Page 19

Construction Safety Requires ResponsibilityBy: Richard J. Mee, ChiefConstruction Safety Division

Give ‘em a BrakeSlower Speeds Save Lives

It’s summer in Michigan–and thatmeans road construction.

As Michigan’s construction workers rollout the orange barrels this season, thestate is pledging to crack down onspeeders and enforce safety rules.

Pay attention, or you’ll pay the price!Look for signs letting you know ofapproaching construction zones. Ifyou’re caught speeding, your fines willbe doubled.

Every year there are more than 2,000injuries in Michigan work zoneaccidents. Don’t become a statistic!Please remember: construction workersare fathers and mothers, sons anddaughters, just like you. Speedingmotorists put themselves, theirpassengers, and workers at risk.

So...this summer, watch out for roadconstruction and when you see workers,please slow down. Let’s keep it safe foreveryone. Give ‘em a Brake!

1) Slow down! Slower SpeedsSave Lives.

2) Turn on your headlights inwork zones.

3) Put down the cell phone.

4) Turn your radio down.

5) Don’t eat or drink.

6) Keep both hands on thewheel.

7) Don’t drive aggressively.

8) Obey work zone directions.Merge early.

9) Watch for work zone activity.

10) Pay extra attention drivingthru work zones after dark.

Top Ten Tips forDriving in a Work Zone

When my four children were in school, ontheir first day back to classes each semester, Iwould remind them that they were starting witha four-point grade average. I explained that onthat first day they had an “A” in each class.This, I reasoned, was because there were nomarks on their new record less than an “A” tolower the average. It was stressed to each childthat any change in their grade would occur onlybecause of something they decided to do ordecided not to do. The point to this was to makeexcellence the paradigm, the default, the goalto which to aspire.

My efforts did not result in children whoachieved a perfect grade report. Although theyall came to love learning and achieved theirown degree of academic success, none of mychildren were great scholars. They all knew myyearly admonition was only intended to remindthem to take responsibility for the results oftheir actions. A point was made, however, anda lesson learned that would outlast their for-

mal educational experience. None of us in anyendeavor should think we have all the knowl-edge we need, and excellence or even improve-ment comes only if we take responsibility andwork at it.Where Are We Going with This?

That principle applies to constructionsafety and health. The construction culture his-torically has been one of strong individualism,tempered by the ability to work together with

other craftspeople to successfully completeprojects on time. Another major attribute of theconstruction worker has been the innovation nec-essary to perform their challenging tasks, evenwithout all of the proper tools and equipment thatshould be on hand in the perfect world. Until rela-tively recently, construction accidents, evendeaths, were commonly accepted in the industryas a consequence of performing rough work un-der less than ideal conditions.

There is no argument that construction workpresents grave dangers. By the very nature of theconstruction environment, workers are commonlyexposed to such hazards as falls from heights,electric wires, heavy materials, powerful machin-ery, excavations, and confined space environ-ments. Add to these perils the continuously chang-ing conditions that are inherent to the very pro-cess of construction and the resultant mix is fer-tile ground for accidents. There is little mysteryto the horrible statistics that have accumulated inthe honorable construction profession.Do the Math

Typically, construction workplace deaths re-sulting from MIOSHA program-related accidentsamount to about 40 percent of all program-relatedworkplace deaths in Michigan. The constructionindustry share of the workforce, however, is onlyabout four percent. Do the math–the resultant con-

clusion is that, on average, it isabout ten times more dangerous,in terms of dying in a workplaceaccident, to be a constructionworker.

These facts beg the ques-tion: Why? Aren’t there heavymaterials and powerful ma-chines in manufacturing plants?Isn’t there exposure to fallingin many other businesses?Don’t power plant workers haveexposure to electric wires? Howdo chemical plant and refineryworkers cope with the confinedspaces in their industries? Whyconstruction? The answers, likethe solutions to the problems,are complex.

Anatomy of an AccidentLet’s start to look at the solution by examin-

ing the problem. One unique facet of construc-tion work is the constantly changing conditions.By definition, as a structure is constructed, theconditions are changing. A recently poured fourthfloor concrete deck, for example, had perimeterguardrails installed and presented no fall hazards.Then, in preparation to build the elevator shaft

“The significant problems we facecannot be solved at the same level ofthinking we were at when we createdthem.” Albert Einstein

Construction of the DEQ building in Lansing.

44444

CongratulationsTenneco Automotive!

Cont. on Page 19Dr. Kalmin Smith (center) presents the Star Award to (from L.) Paul Jenkins,Jeanie Issac Phebus, Doug Hopkins, and Tim Jackson.

Tenneco Automotive’s Grass Lake Engineering Centeris only second in state to receive MVPP Star Award

Raising the Star Flag at Tenneco Automotive.

Tenneco Automotive’s Grass Lake Engi-neering Center has become the second companyin the state to receive a Michigan Voluntary Pro-tection Programs (MVPP) Star award for work-place safety and health excellence. CIS DeputyDirector Dr. Kalmin Smith presented the Starflag to employees at a ceremony Friday, May 19,2000, on behalf of the Michigan Department ofConsumer & Industry Services (CIS).

“I am honored to present this premieresafety and health recognition to the employeesand management of the Grass Lake Engineer-ing Center,” said Dr. Smith. “We applaud thesafety and health leadership exhibited at thisfacility. Your commitment is proof that focus-ing on safety up front is a sound business deci-sion.”The MVPP Star

The CIS Bureau of Safety and Regulationis responsible for the Michigan OccupationalSafety and Health Act (MIOSHA) program.MIOSHA established the MVPP program to rec-ognize employers actively working towardachieving excellence in workplace safety andhealth. It was developed in 1996 to reward pri-vate- and public-sector work sites that developand implement outstanding safety and healthprograms beyond MIOSHA standards.

“Companies that establish an integratedsafety and health program reap the benefits ofdramatically reducing their injury and illnessrates,” said CIS Director Kathy Wilbur .

“Tenneco Automotive’s outstanding safety andhealth record sends a strong message to all em-ployers that safety pays.”

The MVPP Program enhances MIOSHA’stradition of working cooperatively and voluntar-ily with industry to reduce and eliminate work-place injuries and illnesses. The two componentsto the MVPP Program include: the Star Programand the Merit Program.The Celebration

Employees raised the MVPP Star flag dur-ing the ceremony. Accepting the Star award were:Timothy Jackson, Senior Vice President andGeneral Manager, North American OriginalEquipment & Worldwide Program Management,Tenneco Automotive Inc.; Paul Jenkins, GrassLake Facility Manager; Jeanie Issac Phebus,Grass Lake Environmental, Health & SafetyCoordinator; and Doug Hopkins, UAW Local660 Vice President.

“Safety is a top concern at Grass Lakeand the results are clearly wonderful,” saidTim Jackson. “The most recent injury-illnessrate for other companies in our industry inthe state was 7.1, compared with 2.0 forGrass Lake. In terms of lost workdays, GrassLake had a rate of 0.4, compared with 5.1for similar companies in Michigan. The at-tentiveness to safety at Grass Lake assuresthat we protect our most important resource– our people.”

State and local elected officials, corpo-rate and union lead-ers, as well as CISand MIOSHA repre-sentatives, were onhand to congratulatethe Grass Lake En-gineering Centerrepresentatives ontheir outstandingachievement. BradBiladeau read a let-ter of commendationfrom U.S. Represen-tative Nick Smith.Denise Owens pre-sented a proclama-tion from MichiganR e p r e s e n t a t i v eMickey Mortimer.

The MVPP Site ReviewThe Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)

code for this facility is 3714, “Automotive Partsand Accessories.” The operation focuses on re-search, design and testing of automotive exhaustprototypes for original equipment and after-mar-ket applications.

An onsite review is conducted to determinewhether the site meets the eligibility require-ments for participation in the MVPP Program.The MIOSHA MVPP onsite review team con-sisted of David Luptowski, Occupational SafetyConsultant, Team Leader, and D.W. Johnson,Certified Industrial Hygienist. The MVPP SiteCoordinator for Grass Lake was Joe Keenan,Health and Safety Coordinator (now retired). TheGrass Lake team consisted of management rep-resentatives and union officials.

The MIOSHA team conducted the MVPPonsite health and safety review Sept. 20 - 22,1999. The review consisted of: formal and in-formal interviews of management personnel, testtechnicians, and model builders; a site walkaround; observation; fact-finding discussions;meetings with the Partners in Safety AwarenessTeam; and briefing sessions with representativesof management and employees.

The injury-illness rate at Grass Lake fortheir SIC Code was 3.2 for 1996, 2.7 for 1997,and 2.0 for 1998–which is significantly belowthe Michigan rate of 21.6 for 1996, 19.3 for 1997,and 7.1 for 1998. The lost workday case rate forGrass Lake was 0.4 for 1996, 1.3 for 1997, and0.4 for 1998, which is again well below theMichigan rate of 9.5, 7.3, and 5.1 respectively.

“There was definitely a concern for safetyon the part of every employee,” said Luptowski.

Summer 2000

55555

By: Marilyn Knight, MSW, PresidentIncident Management Team

Emergency personnel respond to the Northwest Airlines crash of August1987, one of the worst airline disasters in U.S. history.

Organizational Response afterCritical Incidents —Part Three inour Workplace Violence Series.

Oklahoma City Bombing. EmployeeCrushed in Industrial Accident. Angry SpouseKills Estranged Wife–Then Shoots Self in PlantParking Lot. Employee Finds Co-WorkerSlumped Over Desk From Heart Attack. Shoot-ing Incident at Post Office.

What do all of these have in common? Theyare traumatic for those involved and are referredto, collectively, by the term “critical incidents.”Not only are they traumatic for the individualsdirectly involved in the event, but also for thepeople who witness the event, are responders toit, as well as co-workers, friends, and families.

While most employers have disaster plansthat deal with the physical restoration of theirfacility, few have developed strategies to assistemployees who have survived, witnessed, beeninjured or otherwise had to deal with such events.Post-incident crisis response planning is a meansfor reducing the impact of trauma on the indi-viduals affected, as well as restabilizing the or-ganization after a traumatic event.

The process of developing crisis responseplans is becoming a priority of progressive or-ganizations because it’s consistent with man-agement philosophies affirming the value of theemployee as integral to the organization. More-over, the deployment of crisis response teams isa sign of loyalty and commitment to the safetyand well being of employees who have experi-enced trauma in the course of their employment.Critical Incidents Defined

Critical incidents are defined as events out-side of the range of normal human experienceswhich would be distressing to almost anyone.These events often have consistent characteris-tics in terms of their impact. During critical inci-dents, people are often overwhelmed with a senseof vulnerability and/or lack of control over thesituation. The incidents are life threatening innature, and have the potential for interfering witha person’s ability to function.

Critical incidents may be caused by 1) natu-ral phenomena, 2) technological accidents or 3)man-induced events. Natural phenomena in-clude: earthquakes, floods, tornados, storms, andother forces of nature. Technological critical acci-dents include events such as: fires, explosions,worksite accidents, maiming incidents, falls, andauto accidents. Man-induced critical incidents in-

clude deliberate acts of violence or harm, such as:assaults, rapes, shootings, stabbings, and homicides.

Initially, the physical, emotional and psy-chological reactions to any of these events is es-sentially the same. However, in the long run,technological and man-made critical incidentsseem to have a more significant impact uponpeople and are more difficult to overcome.Crisis Reactions

After witnessing, being victimized or liv-ing through such experiences, people go throughthree stages of emotional and physical reactionsknown as crisis reactions. Stage one is oftenaccompanied by feelings of shock, disbelief, de-nial and/or numbness. Because the event is sofar outside of the range of normal experience,people have no frame of reference by which theycan either process or relate to the event. Denialor numbness, therefore, allows the person theopportunity to start processing the incident with-out getting emotionally overwhelmed. This stagecan last a few seconds, minutes, hours, or days.

The aftermath of a critical incident can causesome people to expe-rience a sense of loss.Their sense of safetyand security about thepredictability of life,which they had be-fore the incident, isshattered. Moreover,after seeing death ora life-threateningevent, people arecompelled to confronttheir own mortalityand vulnerability.

Stage two iscalled the impactstage. The person ex-periences the impactof the event–the inci-dent becomes veryreal to them. The impact stage occurs within 24 to48 hours, after the person has had time to thinkabout the details of the event, its implications, andhow it has changed their life. This stage may lastseveral days to several weeks.

The third stage of a crisis reaction is oftencharacterized by the construction of a new iden-tity. The person goes through a series of ups anddowns because the old identity has been deci-mated by the incident. After critical incidents,people experience a wide rage of emotional re-actions including anger, helplessness, self-blame,confusion, guilt, anxiety, fear and/or powerless-ness. Ultimately, the goal is for the individual toreach closure, enabling them to successfully put

the experience behind them.This does not mean they will forget the ex-

perience, for this is not possible. Rather, the per-son is able to process the event and the impact ithad, allowing them to regain control of their life.It will always be stored in their long-term memoryand may reappear, but much less powerfully,throughout their life. Critical incidents can act asa trigger for people to recall, and to some extent,relive previous traumatic incidents. While this isto be expected, it is helpful for people to knowand understand it may happen. Otherwise theymay become overwhelmed and think they aregoing crazy or are out of control.

There is also the phenomenon of cumula-tive stress which occurs from: exposure to anumber of critical incidents, or exposure to anincident of an extended duration.Factors which Influence Intensity

There are some predictable reactions andsymptoms that occur in the aftermath of criticalincidents. These are experienced in varying de-grees by different people. Some people may have

very intense reactions while others may have littleor no outward reactions. It is hard, if notimpossible, to predict which individuals willhave intense reactions to critical incidents.

There are a variety of factors which mayinfluence the degree of trauma or dysfunction aperson may have. The incident’s location on therange of human experience is one factor. Theperson may also have a buffer, because previ-ous exposure to trauma may inoculate the indi-vidual to handle the current painful event. Forexample, after a plane crash in Michigan, crisisresponse workers noticed different degrees oftraumatic reaction among first responders to the

Cont. on Page 18

Crisis Intervention

66666

n

Workers are constructing an enclosure to contain lead-based paint dustduring abrasive blasting of the bridge.

Blood Lead LevelsAmong Adul ts in Michigan

By: Kenneth D. Rosenman, M.D., Professor of Medicine, Michigan State UniversityAmy S. Sims, ABLES Program Coordinator, Michigan State UniversityJohn H. Peck, CIH, Chief, Occupational Health Division, BSR, CIS

Elevated blood lead levels remain a healthconcern among Michigan residents. Since 1978,Michigan has required clinics, labs, hospitals,and employers to report any patient with a knownor suspected work-related disease, including leadpoisoning, to the Michigan Department of Con-sumer and Industry Services (CIS), formerly theMichigan Department of Public Health prior toApril 1996. From 1992 through 1997, laborato-

ries performing blood lead analyses on Michi-gan residents, including children, voluntarilysubmitted reports of blood lead levels to theMichigan Department of Community Health(DCH). New regulations that became effectiveOctober 11, 1997, require laboratories to sub-mit reports of both adults and children to theDCH for any blood testing for lead.ABLES Program

Coincident to this, CIS received federalfunding in 1997 from the Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (CDC) to monitor adultblood lead levels as part of the Adult Blood LeadEpidemiology and Surveillance (ABLES) Pro-gram. The second annual report on the surveil-lance of blood lead levels among Michigan adultsis now available. As of January 2000, 28 stateshave established lead registries through theABLES Program for surveillance of adult leadabsorption, primarily based on reports of el-

evated blood lead levels from clinical laborato-ries. Six additional states fund similar surveil-lance programs.

In Michigan in 1999, 10,442 reports onblood lead levels were received for 9,484 indi-viduals at least 16 years of age. This was 3,508more reports than were received in 1998, or a50.6 percent increase. The number and percentof individuals with blood lead levels greater than

or equal to 25 mg/dLdecreased from 303(4.8 percent) in 1998to 273 (2.8 percent)in 1999.

Additionally,the number and per-cent of individualswith blood lead lev-els greater than orequal to 50 mg/dLdecreased from 31(0.5 percent) in 1998to 11 (0.1 percent) in1999. This equals a76 percent reductionin the rate of Michi-gan adults withhighly elevatedblood lead levelsfrom the first year ofreporting to the sec-ond year. We are en-

couraged both by the increased compliance withthe reporting law and the reduction in morehighly elevated blood lead levels.Conditions of Lead Exposure

Occupational exposure was the predomi-nant source of lead exposure in Michigan adults.These exposures typically occurred where indi-viduals were casting brass or bronze fixtures,repairing car radiators, or performing abrasiveblasting on outdoor metal structures such asbridges, overpasses, or water towers. Anothercommon but less frequent exposure occurred atshooting ranges.

Lead and dust fumes are serious hazardsfor Michigan workers who are overexposed tothem. Unlike many metals, lead serves no bio-logical function. Lead can be readily absorbedand distributed throughout the human body byinhalation and to a lesser extent by ingestion.Symptoms of chronic exposure may include anxi-

ety, headaches, tremors, excessive tiredness, andother symptoms of damage to the nervous sys-tem. Both men and women can suffer from ane-mia, kidney damage, and reproductive effects.Additionally, women are susceptible to sterility,birth defects, and miscarriages. Children mayexperience other adverse effects related to de-velopmental toxicity and a reduction in IQ, hear-ing, and growth.Employer Responsibility

According to MIOSHA lead standards inGeneral Industry and Construction, employ-ers are required to protect workers from harm-ful lead exposure. This includes making surethe lead concentration in the air doesn’t ex-ceed the PELs. Employers must monitor airlevels and implement engineering controlswhere needed. Where necessary, employersmust provide protective clothing and appro-priate housekeeping and hygiene facilities.They are also required to provide a medicalsurveillance program and conduct trainingprograms for employees. For a complete copyof the lead standards, contact the StandardsDivision at 517.322.1845, or visit theMIOSHA website at: www.cis.state.mi.us/bsr.

Workplace follow-up at 35 companieswhere individuals worked, with blood lead lev-els greater than or equal to 25 mg/dL, showedthat 24 of 35 establishments (69 percent) werein violation of a MIOSHA lead standard. Initialevaluation of these inspections shows them tobe effective relative to other types of workplaceinspections and suggests that they play a role inhelping to reduce blood lead levels. We will con-tinue to evaluate and follow this trend to deter-mine if the initial findings remain over a moreprolonged period of time.Reports Available

The second year of operation of an adult bloodlead surveillance system in Michigan proved suc-cessful in continuing to identify a large number ofindividuals with elevated blood lead levels andsources of workplace exposures that could beremediated to reduce lead exposure. Ongoing sur-veillance in future years will determine if the fa-vorable trend in lower blood lead levels found be-tween 1998 and 1999 will continue.

If you would like to view or download thefull 1999 report on blood lead levels amongMichigan adults, visit http://www.chm.msu.edu/oem/index.htm, or call 517.353.1846 to requesta copy. Additional annual reports are availableon occupational diseases, silicosis, work-relatedasthma, and noise-induced hearing loss in Michi-gan for 1999 and recent years.

Summer 2000

77777

Workplace Safety and HealthMakes Good Business Sense

This column features successful Michigan companies that have established a comprehensivesafety and health program which positively impacts their bottom line. An accident-free workenvironment is not achieved by good luck—but by good planning! Creating a safe and healthyworkplace takes as much attention as any aspect of running a business. Some positivebenefits include: less injuries and illnesses, lower workers’ compensation costs, increasedproduction, increased employee morale, and lower absenteeism.

Blue Water Plastics, Inc.

Carrie Barrette, Tim Koury and Larry Eisenga with Blue Water Plastics.

The Bottom L ine

Blue Water Plastics Company was founded in 1954 by Chris-tian Haas in St. Clair, Michigan. Under his creative management,the company quickly grew from its original building to become aleader in custom plastic molding and assemblies. Carl Haas assumedleadership in 1979, and initiated an aggressive expansion plan.

Today the company has Corporate Headquarters & Technol-ogy Center in Marysville, seven injection molding plants in South-eastern Michigan, a blowmolding plant in Caro, joint ventures inMexico and Germany, and an Engineering/Marketing Office in Troy.They employ 1,250 workers in the U.S.

They are a major automotive supplier and among their manyproducts, they produce HVAC ducts, module components and sub-systems; interior and exterior trim; underhood components; bodyair exhausters; B.I.W. components (shields, covers, barriers, etc.);and fuel system components. Their automotive clients include:General Motors, Ford, DaimlerChrysler, Delphi, Visteon, JohnsonControls, Lear, Nissan, Volkswagen and Mitsubishi. Their 1999sales were in excess of $136 million.Standard of Excellence

The mission of Blue Water Plastics, Inc. is to provide highquality plastic products to worldwide markets where their experi-ence and unique competencies will give them a competitive advan-tage. They are committed to utilizing advanced technology to man-age the design and manufacture of plastic components and assem-blies that add value to their customer’s products.

The company is dedicated to maintaining its tradition of highethical standards, concern for the personal growth and well being oftheir employees, and commitment to their industry and community.For the business to operate successfully, the company believes thecooperation of all employees working together as a team is essential.

To continue to meet the automotive challenge of the future, BlueWater has made a dedicated commitment to the production of quality parts,in addition to an ongoing program of equipment modernization. All oftheir facilities are QS-9000 certified. In 1997 and 1998, they were therecipient of the General Motors “Supplier of the Year” award. Of 30,000suppliers to GM, only 180 received this award. They are also certified Q1by Ford and Gold Pentastar by DaimlerChrysler at all facilities.Employee & Safety Commitment

Timothy J. Koury , Corporate Safety Director and CarrieBarrette, Corporate Safety Assistant, are responsible for the firm’ssafety, health and environmental issues, as well as the worker’s com-

pensation and wellness programs. Blue Water Plastics’ safety pro-gram has been recognized as one of the best in the state. Their manu-facturing facilities have had six MIOSHA inspections without a vio-lation, citation or fine. Several locations have received ErgonomicSuccess Awards and Ergonomic Innovative Awards from MIOSHA.

The safety program has benefitted the company in the area ofworker’s compensation. Their worker’s compensation cost is 1/10of other companies their size and for the last 6 years has run at lessthan $2.25 per $100 of pay roll.

Blue Water Plastics supports its employees through progres-sive and proactive policies and programs, including an extensiveemployee training program. In addition, their comprehensivewellness program funds wellness activities and provides time offfor participation. Recently, they were chosen as a recipient of the2000 Gold Award from the Governor’s Council on Physical Fit-ness, Health and Sports.

Larry Eisenga, Vice President of Human Resources, is instru-mental in the company’s safety activities. “Employee safety and healthis everyone’s responsibility. This involvement minimizes the chancesof accidents, which in turn results in a safe workplace,” said Eisenga.

Blue Water Plastics’ goal is to provide a safe and healthy en-vironment for every employee. According to Koury, “None of thiswould be possible without the commitment and support from Presi-dent Carl Haas, to the managers of each of Blue Water Plastics’11 locations. Safety is everyone’s responsibility.”

88888

By: Gerald MedlerCET Consultant

Rough terrain fork lift truck.

S T A N D A R D U P D A T EPowered Industrial Truck

MIOSHA New InitiativesOutreach Team

The MIOSHA strategic plan NewInitiatives Outreach Team seeks toinform employers and employeesabout new and revised standards. Thefirst project of the team focuses on therecent amendments to the General In-dustry Part 21, Powered IndustrialTruck Safety Standard.

Although MIOSHA does not cer-tify trainers, the outreach committeehas scheduled a series of Powered In-dustrial Truck “Train the Trainer” semi-nars. The objectives of the seminarsare: to assess participant’s knowledgeof the Part 21 standard, to describe theelements of a powered industrial trucksafety training program, and to informparticipants of the recent amendmentsto the standard.

For full information on the semi-nars, see the Education and TrainingCalendar on page 13.

Powered Industrial TruckTrain the Trainer Seminars

Date Location

9/12 Clarkston9/12 Sault Ste. Marie9/21 Roseville9/26 Cadillac10/3 Livonia10/11 Lansing10/19 Howell11/14 Grand Rapids12/5 Kalamazoo

Accidents, injuries and fatalities due to in-adequate maintenance and/or lack of compre-hensive operator training in the use of poweredindustrial trucks has been, and continues to be,a major concern in Michigan, as well as in therest of the nation. According to OSHA, an esti-mated 100 fatalities and 95,000 injuries annu-ally are caused by the unsafe operation of pow-ered industrial trucks.

Federal OSHA’s reaction to this situationresulted in amendments to their Powered Indus-trial Truck Standard requiring operator training,evaluation and certification, which became ef-fective in December 1999.

Michigan has had training and permit re-quirements since 1971 in the Part 21, PoweredIndustrial Truck Safety Standard. Some of thenew federal OSHA requirements were not con-tained in Part 21, however, they were addressedby other MIOSHA standards.

In order to make it easier for employers toidentify these existing requirements, Michigan’sPart 21, Powered Industrial Truck Safety Stan-dard was amended and took effect April 28, 2000.Current rules require that employers ensure thatonly trained and authorized operators shall bepermitted to operate a powered industrial truck.This article summarizes the revisions to Part 21.

The standard states that “an individual whois authorized by the employer and who has theknowledge, training, and experience to train andevaluate the competence of the operator shallprovide the training and evaluation.”

Training shall consist of a combination ofboth classroom and hands-on training. The for-mal instruction can include lecture, discussion,interactive computer learning, videotape, andwritten material. The hands-on or practical train-ing should include demonstrations performed by

the trainer and practical exercises performed bythe trainee. Following the training, the operator’sperformance in the workplace will be tested andevaluated, and a operator’s permit will be issued.

An employee being trained is exempt fromthe permit requirement for a period of not morethan 30 days, provided the employee is underthe supervision of an individual who meets thequalifications listed above. The permit is to becarried by the operator, or be available upon re-quest at all times during working hours.

Powered industrial truck operators are to bere-evaluated and receive refresher training at leastevery three years. Refresher training should alsohelp to ensure that the employee has maintainedthe ability and knowledge to operate the truck ina safe manner. Refresher training in relevant top-ics shall also be provided to an operator when:n They have been observed operating the

vehicle in an unsafe manner.n They have been involved in an accident

or a near-miss incident.n They have received an evaluation that re-

veals they are not operating the truck safely.n They are assigned a different type of truck,

or the truck has been modified.n Conditions change in the workplace that

could affect safe operation of the truck.The vehicles listed below were included in

the original Part 21 standard. Appendix A of Part21 provides pictures with the list of vehicles:n Fork lift trucks or high lift trucks,n Industrial tractors,n Platform lift trucks,n Motorized hand trucks, andn Other specialized trucks.The following vehicles were added to the

definitions contained in Part 21:n High-lift Platform Truck: a self-loading

truck equipped with a load platform, intendedprimarily for transporting and tiering loaded skid

platforms.n Industrial Crane Truck: a

truck intended primarily for pickand carry use in warehousing,yarding, or industrial plant opera-tion over improved or hard-sur-faced roads and yards, includingmaintenance within these areas.n Rough Terrain Forklift

Truck: a wheeled-type truckwhich is designed primarily as afork truck that has a vertical masor pivoted boom, or both, whichhas variable fixed length reachand which may be equipped withattachments and is intended for

operation on unimproved natural terrain, as well asthe disturbed terrain of construction sites.

The vehicles listed below are not consid-ered powered industrial trucks:n Vehicles intended primarily for earth

moving or over-the-road hauling,n Industrial trucks that operate on com-

pressed gas, andn Farm tractors.A significant addition added to Part 21 is

the adoption of updated National ConsensusStandards. Trucks manufactured after Jan. 15,1971, but before 1993, shall be in compliancewith ANSI B56.1-1969. Those trucks manufac-tured after that date shall be in compliance withANSI B1-1993, or as specified below:

ANSI B56.1-1993 “Safety Standard forLow Lift and High Lift Trucks.”

ANSI B56.6-1992 “Rough Terrain for LiftTrucks.”

ANSI B56.7-1987 “Safety Standard forIndustrial Crane Trucks.”

Cont. on Page 17

Summer 2000

99999

The first in a series of seminars titled “SafetySolutions for Nursing Homes and Long-TermCare Facilities” will be held on Oct. 17, atSchoolcraft College in Livonia. This MIOSHAprogram involves a full day of training to ad-dress specific occupational health and safetyhazards that may be causing workplace accidentsand injuries in nursing homes and long-term carefacilities. Topics to be covered include hazardrecognition in the long-term care facility, andhealth-related regulatory issues affecting nurs-ing homes such as tuberculosis, bloodborne in-fectious diseases, and respiratory protection.Back injury and musculoskeletal injury preven-tion assessment tools will be evaluated and po-tential solutions for caregivers introduced. Vend-ers of patient lift assist equipment will haveexamples of devices on site for the demonstra-tion of successful and safe patient transfers.

For more information on training opportu-nities or to schedule a site visit with a CET con-sultant, contact the MIOSHA CET Division at517.322.1809.

Nursing Homes and Long-term Care Facilities

Transferring a frail nursing home patient.(Photo courtesy of MHHA)

nnnnn

Safety Strategies for...

By: Suellen CookCET Consultant

If you had to choose the most dangerousjob in America, you might select a coal miner,steel worker, cab driver or construction worker.Surprisingly enough, the job most likely to in-jure a worker is nursing home caregiver!Caregivers in nursing homes continue to sufferan epidemic of disabling workplace injuries andillnesses. As our population ages, this industrycontinues to grow and expand.

In response to this epidemic, in 1999MIOSHA announced a special emphasis pro-gram for long-term care facilities, as part of ourstrategic plan. During 1999, MIOSHA developeda five-year strategic plan through a team of man-agers with a substantial amount of stakeholderinput. This plan was designed to help MIOSHAeffectively focus its resources on key areas.

Using 19 teams , MIOSHA developed strate-gies and implementation plans for each of 23 per-formance goals. These teams have members fromall program areas affected by the performance goals.The performance goals relate directly to the plan’sthree strategic goals and begin with specificbaselines to be compared to in future years.High-Hazard Industries

One of the 23 performance goals targetsnursing homes and personal care facilities. Spe-cifically, the stated goal is to reduce injuries andillnesses in nursing homes and personal carefacilities by 15 percent. The Standard IndustrialClassification (SIC) codes affected by the stra-tegic plan objective are 8050-8059.

Nursing homes and long-term care facilitieswill be targeted for an increased number of in-spections beginning in the fiscal year 2000-2001.Nursing homes are not the only industry beingtargeted for inspections by MIOSHA. Five otherhigh-hazard industries are also being targeted forincreased numbers of inspections and those in-clude: Metal forgings and stampings–SIC 344;Fabricated structural metal products–SIC 346;Meat products–SIC 201; Construction–SIC 15, 16,and 17; and Educational services–SIC 82.

Why has MIOSHA selected these industriesfor increased scrutiny? The targeted industrieslisted, including long-term care facilities, areconsidered high-hazard industries due to thenumber of MIOSHA recordable injuries and ill-nesses reported that result in lost time days andrestricted days compared to other non-targetedindustries in the state.Caregiver Injuries

Back injuries, among the most serious andexpensive of workplace injuries, are the mostcommon injuries suffered by nursing home work-ers. Nurses’ aides, who provide most of the care

in long-term facilities, suffer the greatest expo-sure and thus the greatest risk for injury. Morethan 18 percent of all nursing home workers willbe injured or become ill on the job each year,and these injuries are not minor. Of those in-jured, more than 25 percent will need more thantwo weeks to recover from their injury.

Back injuries, while severe, are not the onlyexposure risk for nursing home workers.Caregivers in nursing homes are exposed to a widevariety of hazards. Exposures can be classifiedinto six different categories: biological/infectious,chemical, environmental/mechanical, ergonomic,physical, and psychosocial. Given these statisticsit’s obvious there is a need for a wide range ofsafety and health training for long-term care fa-cility employees. Keeping these workers safe andhealthy is not only mandated by the MIOSHAAct of 1974, but is vital to the future of this na-tion and for the sake of some of our most vulner-able citizens–the infirm and the elderly.Education and Training Opportunities

Before MIOSHA begins the enforcement/inspection component of the strategic planningprocess, education and outreach will be offeredby the CET Division to employers and employ-ees in these targeted industries. CET offers free,comprehensive services to help employers iden-tify and eliminate safety and health hazards. Forexample, CET consultants can conduct on-sitehazard surveys (no citations or monetary penal-ties issued), review written safety and healthprograms, and assist with in-service training ofsupervisory staff. These services are providedto Michigan employers at no cost. Some of thesafety and health training programs offered in-clude how to identify and prevent injuries causedby lifting and repetitive tasks, eliminate hazardsthat cause slips and falls in the workplace, andprotect workers from bloodborne pathogens, tu-berculosis, and other infectious diseases.

Educational outreach to health care work-ers has already started in Michigan. SET Grantrecipient, Michigan Health & Hospital Asso-ciation (MHHA) offered a series of seminarstitled “On the Backs of Direct Care Work-ers” in Ann Arbor, Midland and Grand Rapidsin March and April. Under the SET Grant,MHHA is providing in-house hazard recognitionand training for employees to prevent repetitivemotion injuries and illnesses. The CET Divisionwill continue to partner with organizations, suchas MHHA, to promote the MIOSHA strategicplan to all affected Michigan employers andemployees.

Additional CET seminars addressing thehazards associated with nursing homes and per-sonal care facilities will be conducted statewide.

CET SeminarsThe MIOSHA strategic plan Nursing Homeand Personal Care Facilities Team hasplanned a series of seminars which addressthe occupational hazards associated withnursing homes and personal care facilities.

Date Location10/17/00 Livonia1/17/01 Grand Rapids3/14/01 Mt. Pleasant5/16/01 Escanaba8/15/01 Lansing

For details on the Livonia seminar, checkthe Training & Education Calendar on page13. Details on the 2001 seminars will be infuture issues.

1 01 01 01 01 0

Sheila Finch (L) and Gerry Felty (R) receive their awards fromS. William Haynes, Jr. (C) President of the 70th AnnualMichigan Safety Conference.

70th Annual Michigan Safety Conference

If you’re in the field of occupational safetyand health in Michigan, you were probably oneof the more than 4,000 attendees at the 70th An-nual Michigan Safety Conference. The confer-ence is Michigan’s premier safety and healthevent, and was held April 11 & 12, 2000, inLansing. Billed as a “One Stop Shopping” con-ference for all safety and health needs–attend-ees selected from more than 120 training ses-sions and visited an extensive exhibition areawith more than 240 exhibitors.

The conference goal is to help participantsimprove worker safety and health, reduce work-ers’ compensation costs, and increase the produc-tivity and profitability of business and industry.

The Michigan Safety Conference is a vol-unteer association of business, industry and gov-ernment leaders from across the state. The con-ference provides a unique opportunity to shareinformation and ideas on current occupationalsafety and health issues. It boasts members fromsome of the most safety-conscious companies inMichigan, large and small, who are devoted topromoting safety and health in the workplace.

The conference features such diverse ap-proaches to safety as: hands-on training, panels ofexperts, dialogues and discussions, audio-visualpresentations, poster sessions, live demonstrations,and updates on the latest safety and health issuesby recognized leaders in the field. Participants leavethe conference with practical, useful printed mate-rials to assist them in their workplace.

Hundreds of volunteers contributed consid-erable time and effort to stage this year’s event.The Board of Directors is grateful to the count-less companies across the state who allowed theiremployees to work on the conference. MIOSHAis a strong supporter of the conference, with nearly100 safety and health professionals and supportstaff involved in planning and implementation.

MIOSHA encourages anyone associatedwith safety and health in Michigan to become apart of the largest state safety and health confer-ence in the nation. It will provide a valuableopportunity to network and exchange ideas andinformation with safety and health profession-als from across the state. For information on theconference call: 517.630.8340.

Garry R. Felty, CSP, CHSMTask Based Risk AssessmentFacilitator/Safety & Health TrainerUAW Local 730, General MotorsMetal Stamping

Garry Felty joined the MichiganSafety Conference (MSC) as a mem-ber of the Industrial Division in 1982,and assumed the chairmanship in1984. He was elected to the Board ofDirectors in 1985, and current lyserves as a member of the BoardCouncil. Felty served as chairpersonof the Awards Committee for twoyears and co-chaired the Safety Man-agement Section for three years. Hewas elected Executive Secretary in1991, and served as President in1997. Currently he is chairperson ofthe CEU committee. He has devotedhundreds of hours of his time to theMSC.

Sheila A. Finch, CHSP, CHMMNW Region Safety Officer/Mngr.

Environment of CareSinai-Grace Hospital (DMD)

Sheila Finch has 27 year of healthcareexperience and 10 years of hospital safetyprogram development and management.She serves as Safety Officer for the North-west Region that consists of two nursingcare centers, two professional buildings, a400-bed hospital and 100 ambulatory cen-ters. She has served on the Detroit Metro-politan Medical Response System PlanningCommittee and organized 14 Detroit hos-pitals to address emergency preparednessand community response. Her three-day“Train the Trainer” course on hospital de-contamination continues to be conductedfor Michigan hospitals. Finch has exten-sive experience in program developmentand presentation for a wide variety of train-ing programs in the healthcare field.

Distinguished Service AwardSafety Professional of the Year

The MIOSHA booth at the exhibitor’s hall.

Lee JayKueppers, CETConsultant,covered the Top25 MIOSHAGI Violations.

Suellen Cook,CET Consultant,

discussedlockout/tagout

compliance.

John Peck,OHD Chief,gave anOccupationalHealth Divisionoverview.

Summer 2000

1 11 11 11 11 1

Michigan StateAFL-CIO

Safety Council forSouthwest Michigan

About 100 Michigan companies were honored for their work-place safety and health efforts Wed., April 19, 2000, at the 53rd An-nual Safety Awards Banquet at the Fetzer Center, Western Michi-gan University.

The annual awards banquet is sponsored by the Safety Councilfor West Michigan and is the only effort in West Michigan to rec-ognize business and industry for providing a safe and healthy work-place for their employees. More than 200 employers and employeesattended the awards presentation.

Approximately 7,000 businesses and industries were invited toparticipate in the awards by providing their accident rates for 1998 and1999, as recorded in the MIOSHA 200 Log. Companies compete for theawards with other businesses and industries similar in size, and alsowith themselves by submitting their rates from the previous year.

The grouping categories are based on a company’s manhours:Group 1 - One million plus; Group 2 - 500,000 to 999,999; Group 3- 250,000 to 499,999; Group 4 - 100,000 to 249,999; Group 5 -50,000to 99,999; Group 6 - 0 to 49,999.

The awards were presented by Mary Gustas, Executive Di-rector, and Deborah Klerk, Board President, Safety Council forWest Michigan. The following awards were presented for each ofthe six categories: Lowest Accident Rate 1999; No Incident Rate1999 (Group 5 only); No Lost Time Accidents 1999; and ReducedAccident Incidence Rate 1999.

The award, Greatest Reduction in Accidents 1999, was pre-sented to one company in each of the six categories. The award isbased on the reduction of accidents from 1998 to 1999. The six com-panies are: Group 1 - Wise Personnel, Kalamazoo; Group 2 - HayesLemmerz International, Homer Division, Homer; Group 3 - Per-egrine Metalforming Inc., Battle Creek Operations, Battle Creek;Group 4 - Trojan Heat Treat Inc. , Homer; Group 5 - Holland WireProducts Inc., Holland; and Group 6 - Agri Sales Inc., Battle Creek.

The Safety Council for West Michigan has more than 400 mem-ber companies, and can be reached at: 616.344.6189.

April 27 - 28, 2000, the Michigan State AFL-CIO held its bian-nual Safety and Health Conference. The conference attracted nearly500 attendees and culminated with a tribute to Workers’ MemorialDay. Richard Whitwam , Director, Occupational Safety & Health,for the Michigan State AFL-CIO coordinates the conference and saidhe is proud of the proactive role the union plays in assuring work-place safety and health.

Attendees were welcomed by Tina Abbott , Secretary-Treasurer,Michigan State AFL-CIO. Mike Connors, OSHA Administrator, Re-gion V, gave an update on federal OSHA’s initiatives, including theproposed ergonomics standard. Doug Earle, MIOSHA Director, gavean overview of MIOSHA activities and hosted a presentation byMIOSHA Deputy Directors and Division Chiefs.

The topics covered in the conference included: constructionsafety, violence in the workplace, lockout/tagout and machine guard-ing, health hazards for healthcare workers, asbestos, confined space,workers’ compensation, ergonomics, chemical and toxic hazards,hepatitis C, and standards requiring written training programs.

Presenters included representatives from: MIOSHA, MichiganState University, AFSCME International Union, SEMCOSH, Michi-gan Hepatitis “C” Foundation, Kalamazoo County, Michigan StateFire Fighters Local 421, the UAW, and the Michigan State AFL-CIO.

Michigan State AFL-CIO is one of MIOSHA’s SET Grantees.Their grant provides statewide safety and health training to studentsengaged in school-to-work (STW) based learning. The training pro-vides youth entering the workforce with the ability to identify work-place safety and health hazards, so accidents and injuries can be avoided

During the conference on April 28th, a Workers’ Memorial Daytribute was held. This date marks the signing of the federal OSHAAct, and is the day unions remember and pay tribute to those who losttheir lives on the job. It is also a day when members come together torededicate themselves to promote practices that ensure safe and healthywork conditions on the job for all working men and women.

The keynote speaker for Workers’ Memorial Day this year wasMichigan Attorney General Jennifer Granholm. The Attorney Gen-eral urged all attendees to rededicate themselves to worker safety.

Tina Abbott, Mike Connors, Richard Whitham, and Doug Earle.

Wise Personnel of Kalamazoo received the award, Greatest Reductionin Accidents 1999, in Group 1.

1 21 21 21 21 2

NewsWage & HourYouth Employment Investigation

Training

Wage & Hour Division

517.322.1825

Website:

www.cis.state.mi.us/bsr/divisions/wh/home.htm

For More InformationYouth Employment Seminars - Employer Comments

On May 24th and 25th Wage & Hourinvestigators attended an intensive two-day training session. The main emphasisof the training was investigation tech-niques for prevailing wage claims.

The training included an overview ofthe law and policies, as well as practicalhands-on exercises. The objective of thetraining was to continue to improve thequality and consistency in which thesecases are handled.

There was also a presentation by theU. S. Department of Labor (USDOL) Wageand Hour Division, which included anoverview of their program and a discus-sion of ways that we can improve commu-nication and the working relationship withUSDOL. During the month of June, fed-eral and state investigators teamed up toprovide education and training on youthemployment standards to businessesthroughout Michigan.

A representative from the AttorneyGeneral’s office also presented an over-view of their functions with regard to wageand hour activity. There was a questionand answer session and methods to im-prove investigations and documentationwere discussed to increase the likelihoodof successful collection of wages or reso-lution of claims.

The meeting was a success and part ofthe division’s continuing efforts to reviewand improve the services that we provideto employees and employers in the state.

Governor Engler Declares June Youth Employment Month

Governor John Engler issued an Executive Declaration in observance of Youth Employ-ment Month in June to educate employers about legal and safe working environments for thestate’s 466,000 working teens.

The Michigan Department of Consumer & Industry Services (CIS) is kicking off the month-long educational campaign by educating employers about child labor laws. The CIS Bureau ofSafety & Regulation’s Wage & Hour Division is teaming up with the U.S. Department of LaborWage & Hour Division to visit employers to pass out fliers and discuss legal aspects of employ-ing minors in Michigan.

The educational campaign will target retail and fast food establishments where the major-ity of teenagers are employed. Visits are planned for Detroit, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Marquette,Kalamazoo, Traverse City, Saginaw, Mt. Clemens, Ann Arbor, Northville, Rockford, SterlingHeights, Brighton, Auburn Heights, Okemos, Grandville, Livonia, Holland, Roseville andFarmington.

“Michigan employers are encouraged to recognize that hiring youth, even if it is just forthe summer, is an investment in the future of this state,” Governor John Engler said. “Theseearly work experiences help reinforce the work skills and attitudes taught in our homes andschools and will have a major impact on our work force of the future.”

CIS Director Kathy Wilbur said minors are required to have a work permit, which can beobtained in any Michigan school district. Generally, youths must be a minimum of 14 years oldfor most jobs, however kids as young as 11 can work as a golf caddie, sports referee or as a farmworker.

Wilbur said, “Michigan’s child labor laws were created to ensure the safety and well-being of the state’s youngest workers. This summer it is particularly important to ensure thatemployers are educated about these laws since they are more likely to hire teens to help fill thelabor shortage caused by the state’s low unemployment and surging economy.”

Minors aged 14 and 15 can work up to 40 hours per week from 7:00 a.m. until 9:00 p.m.while 16- and 17-year-olds can be employed between the hours of 6:00 a.m. until 11:30 p.m. forup to 48 hours per week.

Michigan child labor law requires that minors not be allowed to work more than five hourswithout a 30-minute break period. Adequate adult supervision is also required for workingminors. If you have questions about the Youth Employment Standards Act, contact the Wage &Hour Division.

Below are comments received from employers following the youthemployment educational seminars provided by the Wage & Hour Division.

“It’s nice to have someone come out and provide the information and explain alittle bit about it without going through any records.”

“We always try to follow the law, but sometimes we just don’t know what isrequired or where to get the correct answers...it’s nice to have someone come andprovide materials and answers.”

“I would strongly recommend that both the state and the U.S. Department ofLabor continue to make these types of educational contact.”

Summer 2000

1 31 31 31 31 3

September12 Powered Industrial Truck Richard Zdeb

Clarkston Peggy DeRosier 248.620.253412 Powered Industrial Truck Gerald Medler

Sault Ste. Marie Sherri Paulowski 906.635.280221 Powered Industrial Truck Bernard Sznaider

Roseville Staff Person 810.445.548026 Powered Industrial Truck Gerald Medler

Cadillac Cindy Swiler 616.775.2458October3 Powered Industrial Truck Suellen Cook

Livonia Diane Burns 734.462.444811 Powered Industrial Truck Debra Gundry

Lansing Sandy Long 517.394.461419 Powered Industrial Truck Karen Odell

Howell Janie Willsmore 517.546.3920November14 Powered Industrial Truck Micshall Patrick

Grand Rapids Dannielle Wheeler 800.704.7676December5 Powered Industrial Truck Micshall Patrick

Kalamazoo Lisa Peet 616.373.7807

July27 When MIOSHA Visits Lee Jay Kueppers

Washington Reid Sheeley 810.752.2091August1, 2, 3 Safety Administrator Course Bernard Sznaider

Port Huron Kathy Young 810.985.182821, 22, 23 Safety Administrator Course David Nelson

Muskegon Lisa Sabourin 231.759.0916September12, 13, 14 Safety Administrator Course Linda Long

Dearborn Nancy Koehler 313.982.613119 Ergonomics & Your Safety & Health Program Suellen Cook

Clinton Twp. Sharon Macri 810.263.288222 MIOSHA Top 25 Safety Violations Workshop Suellen Cook

Clinton Township Sharon Macri 810.263.2882October5, 12, 19 Safety Administrator Course Suellen Cook

Belleville Janet Millard 734.697.715111 When MIOSHA Visits Richard Zdeb

Saginaw Joe 517.790.447517 Safety Solutions/Nursing Homes &Long-Term Care Facilities Suellen Cook

Livonia Diane Burns 734.462.4448November9 Building An Effective Safety Program Richard Zdeb

Saginaw Joe 517.790.447517 How To Survive A MIOSHA Inspection Suellen Cook

Clinton Township Staff Person 810.263.2410

Education & Training CalendarDate Course MIOSHA Trainer

Location Contact Phone

Special Seminars - Powered Industrial Truck - Train the Trainer

1 41 41 41 41 4

Construction SafetyStandards Commission

LaborMr. Daniel CorbatMr. Carl Davis**

Mr. Andrew LangMr. Martin Ross

ManagementMr. Thomas HansenMr. Charles GatecliffMs. Cheryl HughesMr. Peter Strazdas*

Public MemberMr. Kris Mattila

General Industry SafetyStandards Commission

LaborMr. James Baker

Mr. Tycho FredericksMr. Michael D. Koehs*

Mr. John PettingaManagement

Mr. George A. ReamerMr. Timothy J. Koury**

Ms. Doris MorganPublic Member

Ms. Geri Johnson

Occupational HealthStandards Commission

LaborDr. G. Robert DeYoung**

Ms. Cynthia HollandCapt. Michael McCabeMs. Margaret Vissman

ManagementMr. Robert DeBruynMr. Michael LucasMr. Richard Olson

Mr. Douglas Williams*Public Member

Dr. Glen Chambers

*Chair **Vice Chair To contact Connie Munschy, Chief of the Standards Division, or any of the Commissioners,please call the Standards Division Office at 517.322.1845.

Standards Update

Connie Munschy, Chief, StandardsDivision.

Standards Division Receives Clarity Award

CS Part 10. Lifting & DiggingAdvisory Committee Members

The Standards Division recently received recognition in the Michigan BarJournal (May 2000) as one of the first recipients of the Clarity Awards in the newcentury. The clarity awards are given in 20 categories to legal documents that arewritten in plain English, without legalese. The purpose of the awards are: topromote the use of clear writing by legal professionals, to increase publicunderstanding of and respect for the judicial system, and to contribute to theopeness of the legal profession.

Rule R408.41006a, Employer Responsibilities for Lifting and DiggingEquipment, Construction Safety Standard Part 10, was written by ConnieMunschy, Chief of the Standards Division, Bureau of Safety and Regulation, andwas cited as an excellent example of the clear style in which administrative rulesare written.

The Bureau utilizes advisory commit-tees for input into the standards writingprocess. The following people wereinvolved in the process: the Part 10Advisory Committee (see list below), aswell as Rick Mee, Chief of the ConstructionSafety Division, and Construction SafetyOfficer Jim Pike.

The cooperation between the Construc-tion Safety Division, the Part 10 AdvisoryCommittee, and the Standards Division hasresulted in the clarity for which this rule hasbeen recognized. Recognition is also givento Standards staff secretaries DenaHendon and Christine Hundt for theirexcellent preparation of the materials.

LaborDaniel Boone

IUOE Local 324Ken Peterie

IUOE Local 324Joe Wrzesinski

Retired Union MemberGary Ganton

IUOE Local 324Lorne Nichols

Retired Union Member

ManagementJohn DiPonio

Merriman ConstructionCompany

Frederick RozelleConsultant

Alan LivernoisAllingham Corporation

Rolf LovgrenCrane Partner International

Summer 2000

1 51 51 51 51 5

Occupational Safety StandardsGeneral Industry

Part 06. Fire Exits .................................................................................................... Final, effective 5/5/00Part 18. Overhead and Gantry Cranes ................................................................. At Advisory CommitteePart 19. Crawler, Locomotives, Truck Cranes ..................................................... Approved by Commission for reviewPart 20. Underhung and Monorail Cranes............................................................ Approved by Commission for reviewPart 21. Powered Industrial Trucks....................................................................... Final, effective 4/26/00Part 56. Storage and Handling of Liquefied Petroleum Gases ........................... Draft at LSB for formal reviewPart 58. Vehicle Mounted Elevated & Rotating Platforms ................................. Approved by Commission for reviewPart 69. Compressed Gases ..................................................................................... RFR approvedPart 74. Fire Fighting/Amendment #2 ................................................................... At Advisory CommitteePart 78. Storage & Handling of Anhydrous Ammonia ........................................ LSB formal certificationPart 79. Diving Operations ..................................................................................... At Advisory CommitteePart 93. Air-Receivers ............................................................................................. Draft at LSB for informal review

ConstructionPart 07. Welding & Cutting .....................................................................................Approved by Commission for reviewPart 10. Lifting & Digging .......................................................................................Draft at LSB for informal reviewPart 18. Fire Protection & Prevention ..................................................................... At Advisory CommitteePart 22. Signs, Signals, Tags & Barricades ............................................................ At Advisory CommitteePart 26. Steel and Precast Erection .......................................................................... At Advisory CommitteePart 30. Telecommunications...................................................................................Approved by Commission for reviewPart 31. Diving Operations....................................................................................... At Advisory CommitteePart 32. Aerial Work Platforms .............................................................................. Final, effective 4/26/00

Occupational Health StandardsGeneral Industry

Air Contaminants .........................................................................................................RFR approvedAsbestos for General Indusstry ....................................................................................Draft at LSB for informal reviewLead ...............................................................................................................................Draft at LSB for informal reviewMethylenedianiline .......................................................................................................RFR approvedPersonal Protective Equipment.....................................................................................Draft at LSB for informal reviewPowered Industrial Trucks R3225 ...............................................................................Draft at LSB for informal reviewRespirators in Dangerous Atmospheres ......................................................................Draft at LSB for informal reviewVinyl Chloride ............................................................................................................. Final, effective 4/26/00

ConstructionConstructionConstructionConstructionConstructionNoise in Construction R6260 ...................................................................................... Draft at LSB for informal reviewPersonal Protective Equipment for Construction R6260 ........................................ Draft at LSB for informal review

Administrative RulesPart 11. Recording of Occupational Illnesses and Injuries ................................. LSB formal certificationPart 12. Variances .................................................................................................... LSB formal certification

Status of Michigan Occupational Safety & Health Standards

The MIOSHA Standards Division assists in the promulgation of Michigan occupationalsafety and health standards. To receive a copy of the MIOSHA Standards Index (updatedMay 2000) or for single copies and sets of safety and health standards, please contact theStandards Division at 517.322.1845.

Request for RulemakingORR Office of Regulatory ReformLSB Legislative Services BureauJCAR Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

1 61 61 61 61 6

V a r i a n c e sPublished July 14, 2000

nnnnn

Following are requests for variances and vari-ances granted from occupational safety stan-dards in accordance with rules of the Depart-ment of Consumer & Industry Services, Part12, Variances (R408.22201 to 408.22251).

Variances Requested Construction

Variances Granted Construction

Variances Granted General Indust ry

Part number and rule number from which varianceis requestedPart 8 -Material Handling: Rule R408.40833, Rule 833(1)Summary of employer’s request for varianceTo allow employer to tandem lift structural steel mem-bers under controlled conditions and with stipulations.Name and address of employerBroad, Vogt & Conant, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedChrysler Motors Mack, DetroitName and address of employerDouglas Steel Erection CompanyLocation for which variance is requestedState of Michigan Hall of Justice, LansingWilliam Beaumont Hospital, Royal OakGeneral Motors Lansing Building 15, LansingName and address of employerKvaerner SongerLocation for which variance is requestedRomulus Business Center, RomulusName and address of employerMcGuire Steel Erection, Inc.Location for which variance is requested2529 Boardwalk, Ann ArborDodson Elementary School, PlymouthLincoln Middle School, YpsilantiSears The Great Indoors - Phase II, Shelby Twp.Lot #5 - Office Building, Ann ArborAuburn Hills Public Safety, Auburn HillsIslamic Center of America, DearbornThe Michigan Theater, Ann ArborName and address of employerPioneer, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedSpectrum Health, Grand RapidsName and address of employerRichmond Steel Erectors, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedG. M. Lansing Grand River Assembly Plant, LansingName and address of employerSova Steel, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedSunrise Assisted Living, TroyDuke Office Building, Farmington

Part number and rule number from which varianceis requestedPart 10 - Lifting & Digging Equipment: Rule 4084.1015,Rule 1015a(2)(g)(h)(i) & 1018a(12)Summary of employer’s request for varianceTo amend the previous variance request to allow the useof a work platform containing a stripping platform mountedon the boom of a P & H Omega 40 ton hydraulic crane toheights of up to 70 feet provided all of the requirements ofCS Standard, Part 10 - Lifting & Digging Equipment ex-cept Rule 1015a(2)(g)(h)(i) and 1018a(12) are met.Name and address of employerWalter Toebe Construction CompanyLocation for which variance is requested

I-94/I-75 Interchange Project in Wayne County, MDOTProject #BHI82251-45188A

Part number and rule number from which varianceis requestedPart 13 - Mobile Equipment: Ref. #1926.1000 (a)(1&2) (b)Summary of employer’s request for varianceTo allow the employer to work under overhead conveyorobstructions in an assembly plant to dig shallow founda-tion pad excavations without the use of roolover equip-ment providing certain stipulations are adhered to.Name and address of employerAlberici - Walsh - PBMLocation for which variance is requestedMidfield Parking Structure, Detroit

Part number and rule number from which varianceis requestedPart 8 -Material Handling: Rule R408.40833, Rule 833(1)Summary of employer’s request for varianceTo allow employer to tandem lift structural steel mem-bers under controlled conditions and with stiupulations.Name and address of employerAmerican Erectors, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedU of M Hospital Emergency Room, Ann Arbor44th District Court, Royal OakName and address of employerAssemblers, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedCentral Michigan University Park Library, Mt. PleasantName and address of employerCadillac Iron, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedLawrence Technological University, SouthfieldDexter High School, DexterName and address of employerDouglas Steel Erection CompanyLocation for which variance is requested735 East Michigan Ave., LansingName and address of employerMcGuire Steel Erection, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedCenter for Creative Studies, DetroitChrist The King Catholic Center, Ann ArborLighthouse of Oakland Co., PontiacName and address of employerPioneer, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedEast Paris Medical, Grand RapidsName and address of employerRedinger Steel Erectors, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedJacobsons, OkemosName and address of employerSova Steel, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedWayne State University, School of Pharmacy, DetroitGreater Grace Temple, Detroit

Part number and rule number from which varianceis requestedPart 13-Mobile Equipment: R408.41301, Ref. #1926.1000(a)Summary of employer’s request for varianceTo allow the use of a Case Model D310GE Dozer Serial#3040501 in the bottom level of the parking structure

without the use of rollover equipment, providing certainstipulations are adhered to.Name and address of employerAristeo Constructioin CompanyLocation for which variance is requestedSterling Heights Assembly Plant, Sterling Heights

Part number and rule number from which varianceis requestedPart 14 - Tunnels, Shafts, Caissons & Cofferdams:R408.41482, Rule 1482 (g)Summary of employer’s request for varianceTo allow employees to remain in the caisson under con-trolled conditions when material is being hoisted fromthe caisson and according to certain stipulations.Name and address of employerDan’s Excavating, Inc.Location for which variance is requested77' diameter styormwater Pump Station, Romulus

Part number and rule number from which varianceis requestedPart 32 - Aerial Lift Platforms: R408.43209, Rule 3209(8) (b) & R408.43209, Rule 3209 (g)Summary of employer’s request for varianceTo allow employer to firmly secure a scaffold plank tothe top of the intermediate rail of the guardrail system ofan aerial lift for limited use as a work platform providedcertain stipulations are adhered to.Name and address of employerApplegate, Inc.Location for which variance is requestedNorthwest Midfield Terminal, Romulus

Part number and rule number from whichvariance is requestedPart 1 - General Provisions: Rule 36(1)Summary of employer’s request for varianceEmployer has been granted permission to use high pres-sure air guns under controlled conditions.Name and address of employerDouglas Steel Fabricating CorporationLocation for shich variance is requested1312 Waverly Road, Lansing

Part number and rule number from whichvariance is requestedPart 63 -Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills: Rule 6384(2)Summary of employer’s request for varianceEmployer has been granted permission to provide additionalguarding on and control access to the blade of a roll splitter,rather than leave it in the down position when not in use.Name and address of employerCrown Vantage Paper CompanyLocation for which variance is requested1000 N. Huron St., Ypsilanti

Part number and rule number from whichvariance is requestedPart 63 -Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills: Rule 6384(1)Summary of employer’s request for varianceFirm has been granted permission to use 2 hand constantpressure controls in lieu of required interlocked barrieron a roll splitter machine.Name and address of employerCrown Vantage Paper CompanyLocation for which variance is requested1000 N. Huron St., Ypsilanti

Summer 2000

1 71 71 71 71 7

Fireworks SafetyCont. from Page 1

n517.322.1856

injured several people. That explosion wasa wake-up call to the city to closely exam-ine their procedures. They totally revampedtheir program, which now includes: follow-ing all NFPA (National Fire Protection As-sociation) Guidelines; expanding the perim-eter, providing for greater public safety; hir-ing a professional organization for the ac-tual display; using volunteers, particularlyveterans, for securing the perimeter; andhaving adequate police and fire protectionon hand.

Bay City responded enthusiastically toMIOSHA’s request to co-sponsor the seminar.They are very willing to share their experi-ences, in the hopes that other cities won’t suf-fer the injuries their community did. “This isa great partnership. Bay City saw first-handwhat could go wrong, dramatically improvedtheir program, and are eager to share whatthey’ve learned,” said Kueppers.

MIOSHA worked with several stateand federal offices that regulate the manu-facture, storage, transportation, and displayof fireworks to present an all-inclusive pro-gram for attendees. In most Michigan com-munities, local officials have given the firedepartment the authority to conduct fire-works displays. More than 90 representa-

tives from fire departments across the stateattended the seminars.

One major concern for most communi-ties is the need to safely secure the displayarea. During the day-long program participantstraveled to the Bay City fireworks location atVeteran’s Memorial Park to learn how to se-cure a perimeter in order to protect the view-ing public.

Bay City Fire Marshal Michael Halstead

conducted a tour of their fireworks launch sitealong the Saginaw River. Halstead told thegroup that one of their top priorities is to main-tain security at the launch site, and that choos-ing a site with some existing natural or man-made boundaries will enhance their ability tokeep people out of danger.

The following workshops were offered:n David Luptowski , Occupational

Safety Consultant, MIOSHA CET Division.Welcome and an overview of general MIOSHAprogram requirements.n Lee Jay Kueppers, Occupational

Safety Consultant, MIOSHA CET Division.How MIOSHA standards apply to fireworksand fireworks displays.n Michael Halstead, Bay City Fire Mar-

shal. The role of the Bay City Fire Depart-ment for the Bay City fireworks displays.n D/Lt. Larry Lewis , Grand Rapids Of-

fice, Michigan State Police Fire Marshal Di-vision. The responsibilities of local govern-ment units and the fireworks display profes-sionals they hire.n Sgt. Dave Ford, Commander, Hazard-

ous Materials Unit, Michigan State Police Mo-tor Carrier Division. Regulations covering thetransport of hazardous materials.n Jacqueline Darrah, Director of Indus-

try Operations, Detroit Field Division, Bureauof Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms (ATF) andDebra Satkowiak, Special Operations Inspec-

tor, ATF Flint. Anoverview of ATF regu-lations on fireworksstorage and licensing.

All participantsreceived a new pocketguidebook, “CelebrateSafely,” produced bythe American Pyro-technics Association.Based on NFPA Rule1123, the 20-pageguidebook is a valuablereference tool for infor-mation on fireworksdisplay requirements,setup, and inspection.The American Pyro-technics Association,based in Bethesda,Maryland, is the pre-

mier trade association of the fireworks industry.For further information on the association, theirwebsite address is: www.americanpyro.com.

Public response to this seminar was out-standing. CET hopes to offer a similar pro-gram to municipalities next year. For furtherinformation, contact the MIOSHA CET Divi-sion at 517.322.1809.

Remember–Fireworks are beautiful–but they are still explosions!

Jim Chapman, Bay City Firefighters Local 1435; Michael Halstead,Bay City Fire Marshal; Deborah Grether, BSR Deputy Director; andDouglas Doefer, Bay City Fire Chief.

Powered Industrial TrucksCont. from Page 8

ANSI B56.9-1992 “Operator ControlledIndustrial Tow Tractors.”

ANSI B56.10-1992 “Manually PropelledHigh Lift Industrial Trucks.”

The training requirements not specificallyaddressed in Part 21, but required in otherMIOSHA standards, were referenced in theamendment, to clarify the training responsibili-ties. Training associated with the hazards of ex-haust gases and electrolyte chemicals used forbattery operated trucks shall be provided in ac-cordance with the Michigan Right-to-Know Haz-ard Communication Standard, OccupationalHealth Air Contaminants Rule, and Part 33, Per-sonal Protective Equipment Standard.

Several other changes were also made. Whenbeing boarded by a powered industrial truck, a high-way truck and trailer shall have their brakes set,and not less than two wheels blocked or restrainedby other mechanical means installed in a mannerthat will hold the trailer from movement. (Note:the reference to “rear wheels” was eliminated.)

Provisions shall be made to isolate rail carsduring switching operations as required by GI Part1, General Provisions, R 408.10026. Where rollingrailroad cars on a spur track could make contact witha rail car being loaded or unloaded, repaired or ser-viced, or entering a building, work or traffic area–derailers, bumper blocks, a blue flag or blue light,or other equivalent protection shall be used.

Where there is potential for employee ex-posure to injurious corrosive electrolyte solutions(e.g. sulfuric acid) associated with battery-pow-ered industrial trucks, the employer shall pro-vide: personal protective equipment in accor-dance with OH Part 433 and GI Part 33. Theemployer must also provide: suitable facilitiesfor quick drenching or flushing of eyes and bodywithin the work area for immediate emergencyuse in accordance with OH Part 440.

New training certification/operator permitsand a revised operator manual with additionalguidelines for operators of Rough Terrain Fork-lift Trucks are available from the CET Library.Copies of the Amended Part 21, Powered Indus-trial Truck Safety Standard are available from theMIOSHA Standards Division at 517.322.1845.

It should be noted that the new operatorpermit/training certification card not only con-tains listings of equipment covered by Part 21,but also equipment covered by ConstructionSafety Standards: Part 12, Part 13, and Part 32,and will meet training certification and permitrequirements for all these standards.

A new addition to Part 21 is Appendix B,Fork Truck Pre-operation Inspection Checklist.

Employers are encouraged to review andenhance their current training programs for pow-ered industrial truck operators. A higher level oftraining helps employees recognize a hazardoussituation before it becomes an incident. n

1 81 81 81 81 8

Crisis InterventionCont. from Page 5

n

crash site. The officers with field experience seemedto have fewer traumatic reactions, compared to of-ficers who worked primarily at desk jobs.

Other factors which affect traumatic intensityinclude the duration of the event, the amount ofterror and horror at the scene, the amount of trau-matic stimuli, the predictability of the event, andthe level of loss. For the citizens of Oklahoma City,one moment the city was normal–the next momenttheir familiar domain was a site few could imag-ine. The explosion was exceptionally traumaticbecause it took days to perform the search and res-cue operations; numerous lives were lost; the de-gree of carnage was extensive; and the magnitudeof the event affected not only Oklahoma City andthe state of Oklahoma, but the entire nation as well.Post-Traumatic Stress Reactions

After traumatic events, some individuals havedifficulty overcoming the effects of the trauma. Theybecome fixated on the event and cannot get it out oftheir minds. They may have flashbacks, intrusivememories, anxieties, or painful memories. Somehave a fear of a repetition of the incident, or won-der if they will be placed under scrutiny.

If a range of symptoms persists for an ex-tended period, a small percentage of those affectedmay develop post-traumatic stress disorder–a con-dition of emotional pain for the individual and a

possible worker’s compensation cost for theorganization. Some cope by the use of drugsor alcohol to self-medicate the reactions they’reexperiencing. A few workers, who can affordto, quit their jobs to avoid being reminded ofthe event. While others, display physical symp-toms resulting in misdirected medical care.

To reduce such uncomfortable reactionsin employees, as well as the legal, financialand retraining liabilities, many employers haveestablished critical incident response pro-grams. Specially trained critical incident re-sponse teams are deployed almost immediatelywhen notified of a critical event. The team’spresence is seen as an expression of loyalty toemployees, and provides a means to assess theseverity and magnitude of the event, to estab-lish control of the scene, and to offer immedi-ate crisis assistance to reduce trauma.Goals of Crisis Intervention

General MacArthur once said, “The sec-ond-best decision, quickly made, is better thanthe best decision, never made.” In terms ofresponding to crisis situations, taking controlof the scene begins the healing process. Be-cause critical events are unexpected and maytake away a person’s sense of control–any ac-tivities which restore a sense of control willfacilitate the recovery process. Recovery is of-ten a successful reframing of the event, so thatthose people affected can make sense of it.

The opportunity for the team to predict andprepare victims for future emotional reactionsis very important. Because people are not usedto having such intense emotional reactions, theyare unprepared for them. The crisis team edu-cates victims that these are normal reactions thatnormal people have after traumatic experiences–which becomes very reassuring. In essence, theteam is legitimizing the symptoms of the vic-tims, which serves to give them control over oth-erwise very frightening reactions. Such educa-tion and reassurance has been most effective inreducing both workers’ compensation claims andhuman pain and suffering.

In the past, crisis response teams used to bein the exclusive domain of police, fire and emer-gency service departments. Their proven effec-tiveness to help individuals overcome the effectsof trauma, and to assist organizations reduce dis-ability and litigation costs, has caused a growthof such programs within the private sector.

The components of a company crisis responseprogram include: establishing pre-crisis responseplans; training on-site crisis response teams; andfollowing up with traumatized employees, familymembers, and affected personnel.

Understanding worksite critical incidentstress reactions, crisis intervention techniquesand recovery issues can enable companies toprovide important assistance to employees afterwork-related critical incidents.

MIOSHA Peer Support TeamCan you imagine what it’s like to be called out of bed at 1:00 a.m. to

investigate a workplace fatality?As part of our job duties, MIOSHA compliance officers investigate

fatalities, explosions and major accidents resulting in death or a seriousillness or injury. When investigating critical incidents, these officers areconfronted with scenes of horror and destruction, as well as the pain andanguish from those involved.

Bureau administration formed the MIOSHA Peer Support Team (PST)to help compliance officers after critical investigations. The PST is a vol-

untary group which provides confidential, emotional support, resourceinformation and education to their co-workers about the normal natureof stress reactions after responding to a critical incident. The PST teamis composed of 13 employees. Doug Kalinowski, BSR Deputy Direc-tor, facilitates team activities. An outside consultant serves as the clini-cal coordinator, and oversees the delivery of the mental health compo-nent, and trains team members.How does the PST program work?

When a compliance officer responds to a critical incident, thePST program coordinator is notified. The coordinator assesses thenature of the critical incident, and if necessary, assigns a PST mem-ber. Once a PST member has been assigned, they contact the compli-ance officer within 72 hours. The PST member is available to provideemotional support, and places follow-up calls as needed. The PSTdoesn’t diagnose, evaluate, or make assessments or recommendations.Their confidential role is to listen and provide support.

In addition, the PST can arrange for special meeting with the clinicalcoordinator for a debriefing. A debriefing is a confidential, non-evaluativediscussion of the involvement, thoughts, reactions and feelings resultingfrom the critical incident. It serves to mitigate the stress impacts andincludes educational and informational components.

To date, the PST has provided an excellent vehicle to assist compli-ance officers in their response to accident investigations. If you oryour company are interested in learning more about the PST, feel free tocontact BSR administration at 517.322.1814.Author: Kristin Osterkamp was a compliance officer for the OccupationalHealth Division and co-coordinator of the PST. Recently she accepted aposition with Delphi Interior Systems.

(Standing from L.) Lee Jay Kueppers, Doug Kalinowski, JamesBrusen, RobertTriplett, Gary Fancett, Leona Boyer, Kristin Osterkamp, Joseph Ratta, RobinSpaulding. (Sitting) Jeff Silva, Rich Starkey, James Pike, Bill Cannon.

Summer 2000

1 91 91 91 91 9

Construction Safety

Cont. from Page 3

n

Health & Safety Technologyof the New Millennium

walls, the form work covering the shaft wasstripped out. Thus, an opening in the new floorwith a potential fall of 40 feet into the elevatorpit was created.

Reasoning that the wall building crew wouldeliminate the fall hazard, the carpenters whostripped the form work did not construct a coveror guardrails. Unfortunately, in this scenario, theelevator shaft wall operation was late to start bytwo days and no one at the site took action tocorrect this serious exposure. Then, on the sec-ond day after the forms were stripped, two elec-tricians began moving material into the area.

As they were walking along carrying abundle of conduit, the electricians were engagedin a discussion about where to establish theirmaterial storage area. Neither of them was fa-miliar with the newly constructed forth floor areaso they were unaware that danger lurked justahead. Just as they decided where to place thematerial, suddenly one of the electricians walkedinto the opening and fell to his death. A few hourslater, the company safety director reached theemployee’s family to notify them that their lovedone would not be returning home from work.How Can We Stop It?

Events like the tragedy described abovehappen all too often in the construction indus-try. Can they be prevented? Absolutely! Let’slook at each step along the way, and see howbeing responsible for taking the appropriate ac-tions could result in a different outcome.

First, the carpentry contractor that strippedthe form work should never have left the open-ing without protection. Either a cover or guard-rail must be installed when any opening of thistype is created. It is never a safe practice to leavea hazard for another contractor to correct.

Next, the site controlling entity such as thegeneral contractor or construction manager onthe project had a responsibility to monitor thesite for hazards that may develop or be createdby the subcontractors. This responsibility ismandated in the Accident Prevention Programrequirement of the Part 1, General Rules Con-struction Safety Standard. In this case the el-evator shaft opening should have been discov-ered during the regular walk-through of the site.In addition, subcontractor coordination meetingsmust always include safety and health issues.Clear policies must be established by the con-trolling contractor that no hazards can be leftbehind after any work operation, and any un-safe conditions must be reported to the desig-nated safety person for remedial action.

Also, the subcontractor beginning work ina new area must always inspect the area for haz-ards before any work begins. This is also re-quired by the Accident Prevention Program re-quirement and must be done even before mate-

rials are moved into the area. Multi-employerworkplaces are complex and present additionalhazards, but they also offer additional opportu-nities to identify and correct unsafe conditions.

On many construction sites in Michiganthese conditions probably could not exist. Manyconstruction companies have solid safety pro-grams in place that are well developed and rig-orously enforced. These employers have takensafety and health leadership seriously.

Sadly, however, this story in one form oranother is repeated across Michigan far too of-ten. In my “Anatomy of an Accident,” severalfailures occurred to allow the conditions that costa worker his life. The construction industry isstill populated to a great extent by the ruggedindividual types who don’t see the necessity offollowing safety and health programs. Their levelof thinking hasn’t crossed the line to the higherlevel required to view safety as an essential partof their work environment.

The problems that cause construction fa-talities cannot be solved with the level of think-ing that has allowed them to continue. Everyconstruction employer must develop, coordinatewith employees, and enforce–a comprehensivesafety program.Work for Better Grades

As of June 16th this year, there have beenseven program-related construction fatalities inMichigan. This compares to 11 last year, 12 in1998 and 14 in 1997. After a jump in fatalitiesthat peaked in 1997, there is clearly a down-ward trend underway these last few years.

Will this downward trend continue? Will theconstruction industry continue to progress towardbetter grades in worker safety and health? I wouldlike to think so, but I am reminded of the lessoninstilled in my children during their schooling.The outcome depends on how responsibly theconstruction industry faces up to their problemand on how much action is applied.

Ninth Annual ConferenceSponsored by:

Safety Council forSoutheast Michigan

December 7, 2000Northfield Hilton, Troy

For more information contact:Ed Ratzenberger

248.557.7010

“When there is that much commitment fromemployees, you know the program is goingto be a good one. It was amazing to see em-ployees with such a concern for the safety oftheir fellow employees.”

“During the onsite review, I observedthe mutual trust and respect between theemployees and management,” said Johnson.“That relationship cultivated a work environ-ment where health and safety are endemic.”Safety & Health Program

Management commitment to safety andhealth at the Grass Lake facility is an inte-gral part of their corporate culture. Corpo-rate leadership has established accountabil-ity for plant injury-illness rates and lost work-day case rates, and has provided the resourcesto attain safety and health goals. Union lead-ership has demonstrated strong teamworkwith management to ensure worker safety.

“Earning the Star designation was chal-lenging and would not have been possible with-out a true team effort,” said Paul Jenkins, GrassLake Facility Manager. “We could not havesucceeded without the help of everyone at GrassLake, and the close cooperation between com-pany management and union leadership.”

Employee involvement is critical toTenneco’s safety success. A joint manage-ment/union safety committee coordinatessafety and health activities. The committeelocates unsafe equipment and conditionsthrough inspections and initiates corrections.It also ensures that safety and health havepriority over production. The plant has 225employees (comprised of 151 salaried work-ers, 25 regular contract workers and 49 UAWmodel makers) and is represented by UAW(United Auto Workers), Local 660.

Tenneco Automotive has also imple-mented a Partners in Safety Awareness(PISA) Team at this site. Using a behavioral-based approach, Tenneco is able to identify“at risk” behaviors and implement trainingto correct the problems. Tenneco has recentlyformed an ergonomic team at this site.

Tenneco Automotive is a $3.3 billionmanufacturing company headquartered inLake Forest, Ill., with 24,000 employeesworldwide. Tenneco Automotive is one of theworld’s largest producers and marketers ofride control and exhaust systems and prod-ucts, which are sold under the Monroe® andWalker® global brand names. Among itsproducts are Sensa-Trac® and Reflex™shocks and struts, Rancho® shock absorb-ers, Walker® Quiet-Flow™ mufflers andDynomax™ performance exhaust products,and Monroe® Clevite™ vibration controlcomponents.

Tenneco AutomotiveCont. from Page 4

n

2 02 02 02 02 0

Consumer & Industry ServicesBureau of Safety & RegulationDirector: Douglas R. Earle

MIOSHA News is a quarterlypublication of the Bureau ofSafety & Regulation, which isresponsible for the enforcementof the Michigan OccupationalSafety and Health Act (MIOSHA).

The purpose is to educateMichigan employers andemployees about workplacesafety and health. This documentis in the public domain and weencourage reprinting.

Editor: Judith Keely Simons

Consumer & Industry ServicesDirector: Kathleen M. Wilbur

Bulk RateU.S. Postage

PPPPPAIDAIDAIDAIDAIDLansing, MI

Permit No. 1200

MIOSHA Complaint Hotline 800.866.4674Fatality/Catastrophe Hotline 800.858.0397General Information 517.322.1814

Free Safety/Health Consultation 517.322.1809

Consumer & Industry ServicesBureau of Safety & RegulationP.O. Box 306437150 Harris DriveLansing, Michigan 48909-8143

(15,000 copies printed at a cost of $7,500 or $0.50 per copy.)

Website: www.cis.state.mi.us/bsr

517.322.1814 Doug Earle

517.322.1817 Deborah Grether

517.322.1817 Doug Kalinowski

PHONE CHIEF

517.322.1297 Diane Phelps

517.322.1856 Richard Mee

517.322.1809 Maryann Markham

248.888.8777 Jim Brogan

517.322.1831 Martha Yoder

517.322.1851 Ron Morris

517.322.1608 John Peck

517.322.1845 Connie Munschy

517.322.1825 Bill Strong

Director

Deputy Director

Deputy Director

DIVISION

Appeals Division

Construction Safety Division

Consultation Education & Training Division

Employee Discrimination Division

General Industry Safety Division

Information Division

Occupational Health Division

Standards Division

Wage & Hour Division

How To Contact Us

If you would like to subscribe to the MIOSHA News, please contact us at 517.322.1809and provide us with your mailing address. Also if you are currently a subscriber,please take the time to review your mailing label for errors. If any portion of youraddress is incorrect, please contact us at the above number.